Ebrahimkutty v. State Of Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2015/22ND ASHADHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 20997 of 2015 (Y) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
-------------- EBRAHIMKUTTY AGED 66 YEARS KINATTUKARA PUTHEN VEEDU, KULASEKHARAPURAM KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM-690 544.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.R.GOPU SRI.J.NARAYANA PILLAI RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARUNAGAPPALLY CIRCLE, KARUNAGAPPALLY-690 518.
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARUNAGAPPALLY POLICE STATION, NEAR CIVIL STATION KARUNAGAPPALLY, PIN-690 518.
4. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENTS & FINANCE COMPANY LTD. REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, S.S.COMPLEX VADAKKEVILA P.O., POST OFFICE JUNCTION, PALLIMUKKU KOLLAM-691 010.
R1 TOR3 BY STATE ATTORNEY SRI.P.VIJAYARAGHAVAN BY SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 20997 of 2015 (Y) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- P1 : COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION IN FAVOUR OF MR.NOUSHAD DTD.14.3.2013.
P2 : COPY OF THE LOAN-STATEMENT IN FAVOUR OF MR.NOUSHAD DTD.20.5.2015.
P3(A): COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT IN FAVOUR OF MR.NOUSHAD DTD.30.4.2015.
P3(B): COPY OF THE PAYMENT RECEIPT IN FAVOUR OF MR.NOUSHAD DTD.30.4.2015 AND 30.5.2015.
P4 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT LODGED BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD.4.7.2015. P4(A): COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P4 DTD.4.7.2015. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------ NIL /TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE
ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ & A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.20997 of 2015 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th July, 2015
JUDGMENT
Shaffique, J.
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking Police protection. It is inter alia contended that the petitioner's son had taken a vehicle loan from the fourth respondent and has committed default in making payment of certain instalments. The petitioner is ready and willing to pay the instalments. But the fourth respondent is insisting that entire amount has to be paid, failing which the vehicle will be seized. The petitioner apprehends force from the part of the fourth respondent. Though the petitioner had given a complaint before the Police, no action is taken by the Police, hence the petitioner has approached this Court.
2. The learned State Attorney, on instructions, would submit that on the basis of the complaint given by the
W.P(C).20997/15 petitioner, both the parties were summoned to the Police Station. The representative of the fourth respondent submitted that the fourth respondent has no intention to seize the vehicle and they will not use force for that purpose.
3. Learned counsel for the fourth respondent submits that nine instalments are payable, which have been demanded by the representative of the fourth respondent and there is no reason why the petitioner should approach the Police for protection.
4. Having regard to the above factual situation, we do not think that a direction as sought for by the petitioner is required to be passed. Police can interfere only if any offence is committed or there is any attempt to commit offence. We do not think that there is any such situation in the present case. The Writ Petition is dismissed.
ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE vgs13/7/15